Pondering this since I got the A99, if there is really any point in using the crop system anymore.Currently I have the A57/77 and various crop lenses 17-50mm, 11-16mm Tokina, 35mm F1.8DT, 18-135mm DTSince I got the A99 it's been fairly clear I now have the low light performance I was lacking with the crop bodies even though newer cameras are even better the 99 is much better v the other bodies, the jpegs are significantly better (ie I actually use jpeg now in some cases), it has the built in GPS, dual slots. Even though I would prefer a slightly smaller body it's reasonably light for a FF camera

The only think I'd really miss is the Tokina because it's a very good lens. I'm not sure if there is anything UWA which doesn't destroy the wallet for full frame A mount. I can of course use the crop lenses on the 99 in crop mode - but as I have mostly full frame lenses is 24-105m 28-105mm, 50mm, 100mm macro, 70-210, 100-200mm etc. etc. Seems logical to think running 2 x a99's would make more sense.

There are times crop can be useful at the tele end, and for macro. Once you got full frame it's hard to go back to crop Any thoughts?

bfitzgeraldThese are the first impressions of using a full frame, they pass quickly ... Then, rather, there is a lack of a wide angle in existing lenses, moreover, there will not be enough extra 100mm for lenses with focal 200-300mm, which perfectly turn into 300-450mm on a crop cameras. Of course, the a77 has a very noisy sensor, it is better to change to a77-2. Actually it depends where and how to use a77. I have a "dilemma" and what to buy for a wide angle for a99-2. What I want (16-35 Zeiss), the budget does not allow it, even Minolta is expensive.

bakubo wrote:If you sell your A77 and A57 will it be about enough to get a second A99? Or maybe an A7II (or A7III) with adaptor?

Not the bodies but if I dumped all the APS-C stuff it would be enough probably - depending on how you price it and if it sells. At the moment I don't see E mount as viable. The LEA4 gives me A57 AF, which is alright but lacks cross points v the A77/99 and of course the newer bodies have even more. It's workable but not exactly attractive I think if Sony really have no interest in A mount they should at least provide a much more compelling adapter, smaller without a mirror that supports screw drive lenses and a better AF system.

Some say there is no point, but there would be a pretty bad taste in the mouths of A mount users - either Sony need to step up their game a bit and support it a bit better, or provide a solid path for users to migrate if they are done with it. Not a huge fan of the A7 body in ergonomics it's usable just feels like a time warp back to the 70's and mid 80's - we moved past that IMO for a reason

ValeryD wrote:bfitzgeraldThese are the first impressions of using a full frame, they pass quickly ... Then, rather, there is a lack of a wide angle in existing lenses, moreover, there will not be enough extra 100mm for lenses with focal 200-300mm, which perfectly turn into 300-450mm on a crop cameras. Of course, the a77 has a very noisy sensor, it is better to change to a77-2. Actually it depends where and how to use a77. I have a "dilemma" and what to buy for a wide angle for a99-2. What I want (16-35 Zeiss), the budget does not allow it, even Minolta is expensive.

Although I really like the idea of Henry.

The A77 is OK once you adjust the exposure in low light, of course the newer bodies will improve there, but then so does the A99. A77II was on the cards, but Sony obviously decided it's a good idea to charge the same price for the camera as when it was released - no chance I will pay that for a body that's 5 years old, even if it offers some improvements and useful bits and it's newer than what I have still it's not attractive. I would no question get another A99 over an A77II. At a blowout price I might take a look. There are a few ways to play this sit it out and pick up the odd bargain here and there, upgrade or fill in some gaps with the ever falling A mount lens prices (on s/h stuff), or just move to FF and abandon APS-C. That's only worthwhile if I get rid of everything I have that is crop all the lenses.

What Sony does or does not isn't really going to make much difference. They're obviously trying to keep prices high on the 3 bodies they have despite their age, which probably results in most people doing what I do - buying in s/h stuff or just shifting to another platform. In a way their lack of action on A Mount means bargain hunters are doing pretty well - but a lack of updated bodies ie A77III means prices remain high on the A77II and I'm sure people have wandered off as Sony are just doing so little with A mount they probably have no confidence in it. I've not used the Zeiss UWA zoom, the Tam/Minolta is OK needs to be stopped right down to get decent results - the Tokina doesn't need stopping down much at all so in some ways it's a better option for UWA. Depends what you shoot. If you look at the prices on mirrorless lenses it would cost a fortune even to build a modest system regardless of what mount you went to.

So I won't be investing in mirrorless at this time, not even a body and adapter. Sony's obviously more interested in full frame they have nothing really interesting on E mount crop bodies not to me. I could run with what I have and replace lenses here and there flesh out the system (not too many gaps). The less interest there is the lower prices become on A mount lenses -and over time the older bodies become even cheaper as they age. If I were being minimalist I could run with an A99 28-105mm and a few lenses which I mostly have sorted. I can get the results I want from this, if not better so to me the new stuff that comes out isn't very relevant to me.

You will need to get high end glass to do a full frame sensor justice and even then some edge performance can be less than perfect, I moved over to a Panasonic DMC-FZ330 Bridge, ( no more bag of lenses ) small sensor but the Leica F-2.8 constant Vario Elmerit zoom goes a long way in making up for that. However I still have my little Sony 90v compact for holidays, so I haven't jumped ship completely

classiccameras wrote:You will need to get high end glass to do a full frame sensor justice and even then some edge performance can be less than perfect, I moved over to a Panasonic DMC-FZ330 Bridge, ( no more bag of lenses ) small sensor but the Leica F-2.8 constant Vario Elmerit zoom goes a long way in making up for that. However I still have my little Sony 90v compact for holidays, so I haven't jumped ship completely

Depends a lot on the lens. And of course something like an A99II is going to be harder on the lenses than a lower resolution sensor.My experience so far is that most of the lenses have held up remarkably well on full frame. What you do notice is more vignetting, which APS-C cuts out due to the crop, edges are corners vary significantly depending on the lens used.Most of them I had shot on 35mm film so I had a reasonable idea of what was going on. Also worth noting that APS-C 16/24mp is a lot harder on FF lenses in the central area than a 24mp body lower density. Saying that if a lens is holding up on APS-C it's likely to do well on full frame. I think the A99II is 18mp in crop so you get a fairly good idea on the performance in the APS-C area.

You have to be really careful with lens reviews/testing - often people complain about "soft lenses" and the focus can be very slightly off on a tele lens, and weak results. If focus is spot on then you see what's going on. I can only say lenses like the 70-210mm F4 CA aside is sharp at 210mm F4 on APS-C and 35mm with little drop off on edges, some but not very much. The 90/100mm Macro lenses show a lot more vignetting on FF, but are very good across most of the frame. It's just so variable you can't call it as a general thing, most zooms will need to be stopped down for good corners, some to F8 some a bit more, others are quite good at F5.6. Every lens is different. For UWA I'd agree I don't have to stop the 11-16mm down much at all, a FF UWA much more. But I've not used the Zeiss ones on A Mount. Some complain the 24-70mm F2.8 isn't great in the corners even stopped down - I just don't know I've not used/tested it. Then you get sample variation I think I had a mediocre copy of the 24-85mm it was decent but not great, not nearly as good as the 24-105mm (at either end the 24-105mm is sharp stopped down 24mm and good wide open 105mm). That can skew reviews and results so I tread with caution. I've seen several lenses get a bad rap for being poor, and I've not really found that myself, on the reverse some get rave reviews and I'm not been blown away with a few.

Not really decided what to do APS-C if I shoot more action or dabble with wildlife it's probably worth keeping. I was quite deliberate in not buying many crop only lenses with a view to FF later on which has worked out quite well. Sometimes I miss the simplicity of a bridge camera, and loathe carrying stuff around too . Solution was to just take less

After much thought on this I decided that I should probably just keep what I have run with it and maybe later on bag some deals as prices tumble. I did use the A77 the other day and I still quite like it the A57 is a workhorse for bits and pieces so I'll just shoot the 3 bodies and hang onto the handful of crop lenses I have.Later on maybe the A99II will drop in price or the A77II for action, there are a few lenses I'd like to add (not many but a couple)I'm way too invested in the system at this stage to dump it (yes considered that as well) E mount is way too expensive to even consider at this time nor a complete switch viable. What I have works and I'll hammer out the stuff and use it to the fullest extent I can. Selling A mount stuff yes you can, prices are not so good it's more a buyers marketEnd of the day the lenses are the main investment crop or FF. Bodies only drop in price s/h - even if nothing else turns up what's out there is plenty enough for my needs. Appreciate the feedback on this from forum members